This thesis adds to the literature surrounding technification in securitizing cyberspace by examining the role of technical experts in constituting threats in cyberspace at the level of the state. Furthermore, this thesis considers the impact of technocratic framing on the public's understanding of cyberspace and the historical conditions under which this framing developed. / Master of Arts

This thesis aims to contribute to the scholarship of International Relations (IR) by researching the processes that lie at the heart of military interventions and their legitimization through the lens of securitization theory. Focusing on the case of the French operations Serval and Barkhane in Sahel. This study builds on the contention that securitization is best applicable to military interventions in the form of a sequential model that distinguish three steps: the stage of identification, the stage of mobilization and the stage of desecuritization. Coupled with a qualitative content analysis it becomes a redoubtable tool to uncover the construction of legitimization.

The covid-19 pandemic confronted the world with one of the biggest challenges of the future: global health security. Analyzing the pandemic through the lens of securitization theory can create a deeper understanding of the connection between global health and international politics. This thesis underlines the deeply political character of (de)securitization and the impact that new types of security threats can have on the international system. It analyzes the effects of (de)securitization on the behavior of states towards each other and argues for a more comprehensive and cooperative approach to the threats of the future. This can be achieved by incorporating the concept of risk into the framework of securitization as well as by broadening the political understanding of the process.

The thesis proposes the analytical review on how the Baltic States, namely, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia perceive Russia as a threat to their national security by addressing and evaluating the main changes in their security policies. To analyze the changes and differences in their perception, the securitization theory is applied. Following the most recent changes in the security environment in Europe, starting from the Ukraine crisis and annexation of Crimea in 2014, supplementary theoretic concept such as security dilemma is used for better understanding of the challenges that the Baltic States/NATO - Russia relations face. The main goal of this thesis is to provide a detailed overview of how Russian interference in Ukraine's domestic affairs, created a sense of anxiety in the Eastern Europe and affected security sectors of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia. Keywords: the Baltic States, Russia, Ukraine Crisis, Securitization theory, Security Dilemma, NATO

The Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 was the start of the increasing tensions inthe Baltic sea. According to the Swedish government, the threats against the Nordic-Baltic countries have increased and this study will examine the Swedishgovernment’s security measures during the period of 2014 - 2020. Our methodselection is based on a qualitative text analysis. To review Sweden’s arrangements,we will analyse one proposition from a theoretical framework that is constituted ofthe Constructivism theory and the Securitization theory. The conclusion of the studyis that the Swedish government looks at the situation in the Baltic sea as amultidimensional security process. In order to protect the Swedish territory, thecountry must expand and strengthen both its national and international militarypower.

This study looks at the discursive threat constructions of political elites in Hungary during a time span corresponding to the European Migration Crisis. Securitization theory is used in conjunction with a Critical Discourse Analysis to analyse the communicated threat perceptions that led to the extraordinary security measure of building fences. Analysis finds that there was a clear grammar of security in all discourses – on both the state and the regional level - in identifying migration as a possible threat. Characteristics of the discourses varied between the state agents in different contexts in terms of wording, the referent objects they focused on and the utterance of speech acts. The study demonstrates that securitization did successfully happen, but argues that it was likely the result of securitization not happening on a regional level prior. In the study, the European Migration Crisis, the migration-security nexus, and the Copenhagen School’s earlier work: Identity, Migration and the New Security Agenda in Europe are also explored. The latter work is incorporated in the analysis by testing its correspondence with the communicated threat constructions in Hungary. The study finds strong correlations between the theorized, emerging security landscape and the communicated threat perceptions.

This thesis analyzes Sweden's unique and puzzling approach to the COVID-19 pandemic by using the securitization framework, exploring if Sweden's strategy during the pandemic's first year reflects securitization, (de)securitization, or non-securitization. It employs content analysis to evaluate Sweden's response, analyzing primary sources and academic literature, and uses a discourse table based on existing theoretical studies by Barry Buzan, Ole Waever, and Jaap de Wilde (1998) and Lene Hansen (2012) to assess indicators of securitization, (de)securitization or non-securitization. The study finds that initially, Sweden combined (de)securitization and non-securitization, led by the state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell and the Public Health Agency of Sweden (PHAS), treating the virus as a manageable health issue within existing healthcare systems. However, as the pandemic progressed, the Swedish government, led by Prime Minister Stefan Löfven, adopted a securitization strategy, framing COVID-19 as a significant national health threat. This shift illustrates the dynamic roles of various actors in pandemic discourse. The thesis argues against a binary view of securitization and (de)securitization, showing their fluid application in real-world crises. It highlights the interaction between scientific and political decision-making in crisis management, suggesting a spectrum of responses involving (de)securitization and non-securitization.

There are more refugees in the world than ever. There seems to be differences in reactions towards refugees depending on where they are fleeing from. The war in Ukraine shines a light on this issue. This study aims to increase knowledge of what contributes to the conceptions that sets the foundation for how refugees are represented. The questions answered are: How do Swedish political parties represent refugees in the beginning of the Ukraine refugee situation 2022 and the refugee situation in 2014 - 2016? How can differences over time and between political parties be understood through theories of othering, securitization and welfare chauvinism? This is answered through a text analysis using material from the three biggest Swedish parties from the two different time periods. A WPR-method is employed to analyze both different representations of refugees over time and how refugees are framed by different political parties. The results show that the parties express more solidarity towards Ukraine refugees and more distrust towards non-European refugees. There are clear signs of othering, securitization and welfare chauvinism especially from the Sweden Democrats but also from the Moderate Party while the Social Democrats tend to focus more on concepts of solidarity.

The state of Arizona became the main corridor for unauthorised migration into the United States in the early 2000s. A security approach to the issue at the state and local levels of policymaking became increasingly marked later in that decade. This escalation challenged the longstanding settlement in the United States that immigration was an exclusively federal matter, but occurred during a time when, by traditional measures, the unauthorised entry problem was easing. Such a development raises important questions about why security is chosen as a policy approach, highlighting the need to understand the securitization of immigration as a matter of political rationality. This thesis uses recent immigration politics in Arizona as a case study in order to examine why policymakers treat an issue like immigration as a security issue, when other interpretations are available. This thesis provides a detailed historical narrative of the evolution of migration and border-security politics at these levels of government in Arizona from 2004, when a broad political consensus began to emerge that there was a security problem on the international border which the state had to act to address, to 2011, when the then-years-long trend of securitizing immigration at the state level was abruptly halted. Taking an interpretivist approach to understanding policymaking, this thesis employs semi-structured elite interviews with state and local-level policymakers in Arizona, and extensive analysis of media and government documents. This research contributes originally to knowledge in two main ways. First, it furthers the migration politics field by advancing its understanding of the securitization of migration, and particularly the phenomenon of parties across the political spectrum coming to support security approaches towards, and restriction of, immigration. This thesis thoroughly explains the occurrence of this phenomenon in a major case, identifying the elite political logics, strategies, and understandings that were instrumental in the decisions that composed this process. Second, this thesis contributes to a developing security-studies literature that conceptualises securitization not as an “exceptional” form of politics, but as driven by “normal” political considerations. This research identifies how competitive democratic political logics produced phenomena usually ascribed by securitization theory to exceptionalism, including the narrowed field of contestation around security issues, and the adoption of policies that would previously have been considered extreme. It also examines how, in this case, securitization was successfully contested democratically. In this way, this thesis contributes toward the development of a concept of “security politics.”

Japan is facing a reality in which the peaceful safeguards of Article 9 of the constitution has become an obstacle for the Government of Japan to ensure the safety and security of its people. Under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, major security policies have been implemented that have come to redefine the role of Japan within the international community. The aim of this thesis is to outline what policies were implemented by the Government of Japan, how these differed from the previous policies, and how they were received by the Japanese voters, to create an understanding of how Japan came closer to constitutional amendment through the two national elections in 2014 and 2016. The thesis presents the developments leading up to the two elections, as well as security and economic measures taken by the Japanese government. This is then followed with the use of the Copenhagen School´s Securitization theory, to analyze the events, measures taken, and the response from the Japanese voters. The Analysis concludes that the Japanese public have remained divided on the topic of constitutional amendment, but been in favor of the continuation of the Abenomics, the economic policies pursued by the Government of Japan, which has also been a major topic in the two elections.